The Polymorphic Death of Team Games

[Mr Changsha]

You just convinced me to buy premium.

Ha!

My old pal fruitcake contacted me a few days ago on a similar basis. As he put it "This is the thing that would get me back playing CC".

I can already see a division being created between those of us who lead games chomping at the bit for polymorphic games to be included in clan wars, and those who play in 'democratic systems' or who follow orders desperately trying to keep them out.

I do wonder if CC fully considered the consequences of this new setting when they launched it. 'Polymorphic games are to replace 1vs1", well yeah, but it seems quite obvious to me that to players who currently lead team games polymorphic games will swiftly replace team games.

However, as I wrote above I am interested in the idea that what we want may not actually be good for us.

[DoomYoshi]

You just convinced me to buy premium.

Ha!

My old pal fruitcake contacted me a few days ago on a similar basis. As he put it "This is the thing that would get me back playing CC".

I can already see a division being created between those of us who lead games chomping at the bit for polymorphic games to be included in clan wars, and those who play in 'democratic systems' or who follow orders desperately trying to keep them out.

I do wonder if CC fully considered the consequences of this new setting when they launched it. 'Polymorphic games are to replace 1vs1", well yeah, but it seems quite obvious to me that to players who currently lead team games polymorphic games will swiftly replace team games.

However, as I wrote above I am interested in the idea that what we want may not actually be good for us.

Meh, I generally follow, but at times I play team captain and we generally win. I don't think even if I was a full time team captain, would I switch over to polymorphic full time.

[Mr Changsha]

You just convinced me to buy premium.

Ha!

My old pal fruitcake contacted me a few days ago on a similar basis. As he put it "This is the thing that would get me back playing CC".

I can already see a division being created between those of us who lead games chomping at the bit for polymorphic games to be included in clan wars, and those who play in 'democratic systems' or who follow orders desperately trying to keep them out.

I do wonder if CC fully considered the consequences of this new setting when they launched it. 'Polymorphic games are to replace 1vs1", well yeah, but it seems quite obvious to me that to players who currently lead team games polymorphic games will swiftly replace team games.

However, as I wrote above I am interested in the idea that what we want may not actually be good for us.

Meh, I generally follow, but at times I play team captain and we generally win. I don't think even if I was a full time team captain, would I switch over to polymorphic full time.

Well, I am one and I think it is inevitable I am going to switch over. I was discussing this yesterday with spazzattack, who plays as my second, and he certainly couldn't see any prospect of me continuing to play team games in the long-term.

Now what's the result of CC deciding that clans will exclude polymorphic games, if most of the team leaders only want to play those games? I can give you the answer: it will be an enormous smash-up.

So, as usual, I am making some intellectual leaps. First, team leaders will prefer playing polymorphically as they can do what they do now with FAR less effort. Second, team leaders tend to be the most influential voices in the clan as they have high win rates/respect etc. Third, team leaders will begin to demand the inclusion of polymorphic games in clan wars as that will be what they want to play. Fourth, clans will not be able to resist it as their best players will be the ones demanding it. Fifth, some players who are not currently team leaders will realise that they can control all the armies well and that it was a lack of confidence or reputation holding them back from being team leaders and they will support it too. Sixth, there is going to be a huge split inside most of the clans, and in the CD and Friends forum and it is going to get very, very messy.

This is all very clear to me.

[BigBallinStalin]

[Crazyirishman]

So, as usual, I am making some intellectual leaps. First, team leaders will prefer playing polymorphically as they can do what they do now with FAR less effort. Second, team leaders tend to be the most influential voices in the clan as they have high win rates/respect etc. Third, team leaders will begin to demand the inclusion of polymorphic games in clan wars as that will be what they want to play. Fourth, clans will not be able to resist it as their best players will be the ones demanding it. Fifth, some players who are not currently team leaders will realise that they can control all the armies well and that it was a lack of confidence or reputation holding them back from being team leaders and they will support it too. Sixth, there is going to be a huge split inside most of the clans, and in the CD and Friends forum and it is going to get very, very messy.

This is all very clear to me.

I don't foresee much of a schism taking place within clans. One thing that I think is overlooked about the leader types is: How their quality of play would be in poly in comparison to regular team games, as I could see it being a lesser quality of game play than a game that requires communication. Even the best players from time to time need the 2nd to point out minor difference such as "why this fort instead of that one" or "what about if team 2 attacks from region C or forts to region Y" , as both give rise to conversation and explanation so everybody gets a good feel for a turn before its played. With poly their is the ever increased chance of: "oh shit, I forgot about XYZ" and thus the minor checks and balance system of team chat no longer provides that last level of confirmation that makes the greatest players so great.

[Mr Changsha]

I would just like to emphasise this point:

'If this setting had been available years ago, would team leaders have played team trips and quads then, or instead played polymorphic trips and quads?"

If the answer is the latter, and I think it is, then we can see what's going to happen in the future.

I take your point, to an extent, about the value of seconds. But I think you have to factor in ease of play for someone like me. Also, as a further point: consider that we all came here as standard solo players..that's what risk was to us originally. We graduated to team games because trips/quads is a brilliant game. So we have got used to playing it in teams...because we had to. But now we don't..and as someone who was always a standard player first who moved to teams I would be a prime candidate to switch entirely to polymorphic games. But aren't most team leaders solo players leading others but to a great extent still playing solo (if you see what I mean)..?

[iAmCaffeine]

I can already see a division being created between those of us who lead games chomping at the bit for polymorphic games to be included in clan wars, and those who play in 'democratic systems' or who follow orders desperately trying to keep them out.

I lead the majority of team games I play. However, if polymorphic games start finding their way into regular clan wars, I'll strongly consider leaving Aeternus.

Have you tried a polymorphic game yet? I think it's a totally different experience to a team game.

[AAFitz]

You just convinced me to buy premium.

Ha!

My old pal fruitcake contacted me a few days ago on a similar basis. As he put it "This is the thing that would get me back playing CC".

I can already see a division being created between those of us who lead games chomping at the bit for polymorphic games to be included in clan wars, and those who play in 'democratic systems' or who follow orders desperately trying to keep them out.

I do wonder if CC fully considered the consequences of this new setting when they launched it. 'Polymorphic games are to replace 1vs1", well yeah, but it seems quite obvious to me that to players who currently lead team games polymorphic games will swiftly replace team games.

However, as I wrote above I am interested in the idea that what we want may not actually be good for us.

How often is something you want good for you....

Just have fun man, you're over thinking it.

This will ultimately make team games better. Players will get to learn the intricacies of team games and just how important each players move is, and while perhaps less team games may be played sans polyguys, the ones that will be played, will be better.

It also creates an arena in which good teammates that are good at taking orders but not leading, will be summarily crushed by the actual stategists, theoretically every time.

There's no hiding now.

[iAmCaffeine]

Agreed.

[AAFitz]

I am not kidding when I say I already got my $25 worth of premium, this morning.

[Vid_FISO]

i can forsee the gap between the top and bottom clans potentially getting smaller.
The top clans have players that all listen and discuss startegy. If one map has a player that knows what to do he can rely on his 3 team mates doing what he asks.
The lower clans have players that miss turns or don't read chat and do their own thing.
Polymorphic clan wars lets the smaller clans win maps with their better players that would normally be lost

I think that I have to broadly disagree with you with most of this.

We'll move closer to the top clans, but the gap between top and bottom might not change that much and that will have precious little to do with polymorphic or any other game settings. Players come, players go, clans form, dissolve, split and merge, strong clans can become weak, weak clans can become strong, we tend not to notice too much in our stable world but it's quite volatile out there!

We don't have any players that refuse to play due to wanting to avoid maps, settings, particular opponents or even certain team mates, games are there to be filled and invites are always accepted and our players will always try to find the right moves. On most of our favoured maps we don't have leaders as such, mainly due to the team having learnt the map together in the first place. On most of our first choice maps if you had to pick one person to represent us in a polymorphic game who would you choose? In most cases there is no obvious leader/ best player, nearly all team members could take the slot and put up a good fight.

The one area I believe that polymorphic will help us in is with the players that lack belief/ self-confidence in team play, intelligent people, very good at 1v1, this setting may well aid them to gain that extra confidence and help us push on up the clan ranks.

[Agent 86]

Mr C, what you say is totally correct but after playing with yourself for periods of time..you will want to be with others So Poly is fun for a while and then gets boring, changing the other hand can work but then it gets boring too So playing with others is so much more fun wouldn't you agree? Clan world will probably see it this way..oh by the way Poly only plays with premium players. Still it's fun to play with yourself once in a while

[khazalid]

poly is great. no need to balance misanthropy with need for usapoc doubles! teammates are so 2012

[BigBallinStalin]

Playing with oneself has been humanity's favorite pasttime for centuries, and couple this with the higher ranks' burgeoning egos, I also predict that the polymorphic setting will displace many team games. Oh, they'll hold a few team games for sentimental reasons, but given the greater chance of securing more points, the high rankers will opt for many more polymorhpic games.

Furthermore, if there is a strong positive correlation between polymorphia and chronic masturbation, we would have to conclude that polymorphic players are indeed wankers.

[Denise]

Go away, polymorphic games! I'm wasting way too much time on you! Just when I think I can divulge in moderation, CC offers a new, better drug. GGGRRRRR ... all those CC* meetings wasted.

*CC: Conquer Clubaholics

[Scott-Land]

Interesting concept/ game type.... I like it. Can't say I agree with many of the posts-- pros or cons. I do have to say this tho', two minds are better than one and that's why you play with teammates. I would also think it would be a welcome addition in clan challenges.

If you're bad at singles. you'd probably be twice as bad at this game.

--SL

[benga]

The games in which you have complete control anyway, will be better played with poly,
in games in which cooperation is needed you will play team.

This can be easily introduced in CWs by limiting player to possible % of slots per war.

[JBlombier]

When Polymorphic was introduced I had a feeling of relief, because I've been a huge fan of this suggestion since the year it was suggested. Now I'm playing a few games on the setting and I can only say it hasn't let me down.

My narcissistic ego always wanted these games, because I've always been the leader in my clan's games and thought it'd be nice to have a game without teammates missing turns at unappropriate times or not reading the chat. So far, Polymorphic is gaining me rank on a steady pace. I'm sure that if I go on like this, I'll be Brigadier-ish and stay there.

Now there's an interesting thing going on. I have a few quadruples games that are coming down to the last rounds in my clanwar and I'm leading those. I've been giving advice, telling people what to do and listening to their opinions and form them into a teamplan. Most of these games are so suspenseful, I can't wait to see what's happening when I log on to CC.

Polymorphic will never be able to replace this. Even when Poly is introduced into clanwars, it'll never be the same as an old-fashioned quadruples game where you're never a 100% in control. Everything can happen. If someone's dog dies, that person might miss the vital turn. If your dog dies, in Poly, you still have the choice to take your turn or let the game go. I think the suspense of team games will never be overthrown by the need to control the game.

Polymorphic is a nice feature and I'll use it, even if just to show myself I still got the hang of this after all these years. It will never be more than a nice feature. With the bigger attention the site is giving to clans, team games will never die.

- JBlombier

PS. All the above is not even taking into consideration that it's way more fun to play with other people you know, but that has been said enough in this thread already.

[Donelladan]

Mr. Changsa, concerning your team leader in clan world, I am quite surprised of what you say.
I am a team leader for some maps in my clan. But this is mainly conquest maps where the strategy for team game is relatively simple and one can decide everything alone.
Concerning normal map, even if I am team leader, I always discuss most of the moves with my teammates. Especially for the first 5-10 rounds everyone has to have a look to a map and everyone discuss it. That's, I think, how you can becomes good at quad/triples games especially. Because everyone comes, and think of what is the better strategy. And there is sometimes obvious choice, but often there is also many possible options, all are good, some may be better, and to see all and plan everything, being 4 people discussing rather than one deciding really help.
Even if at the end, we decide to do what I propose at the beginning, the discussion allowed us to plan moves for the next rounds and may also help us to change or adapt our plans faster according to opponents team moves.
Plus, I also like to play team games with my clanmate because this is more fun. Reading all their comments, jokes, curses, and whatever they put in game chat is why I like team games. Strategy is one thing that make me like team games, but interaction with my teammates is definitely what make me love team games.
For those reasons I'll never stop playing team games.

I agree we came playing risk by playing risk in solo. But we played risk because we play with friends. Playing here single games, there is very few interation with other players. Playing team game give me those interactions. And being in a clan make me feel like playing with friends.

So, for some reasons I understand and share you point of view that team games may suffer from polymorphic.
But I dont see clans playing mainly polymorphic, and if I have my way I'll refuse to play clan wars including polymorphic because they have nothing to do with clan. Clan is a group of players playing together. If we play alone wtf are we doing in a clan.

[JBlombier]

I agree we came playing risk by playing risk in solo. But we played risk because we play with friends. Playing here single games, there is very few interation with other players. Playing team game give me those interactions. And being in a clan make me feel like playing with friends.

This is a very good point that I fully agree with.

[Mr Changsha]

I will respond to some of the lengthier posts in detail later, but I would just like to make a couple of points independent of what has been said up to now and having considered the issue further these last couple of days.

First of all, I wonder if we can agree that polymorphic games are going to enter the cup and league competitions, probably taking up 25% of the games. I would also suggest that individual clan wars will begin to fight polymorphically within the next month or two. Those that have suggested that even the introduction of polymorphic games into clan competitions would impel them to leave their clan are, in my humble view, being rather unrealistic. Polymorphic games obviously have strategic validity, people are going to want to play them and the strongest players in particular are going to want to compete in this way.

Do I want to see team games ruined by polymorphia? Absolutely not, but do I see polymorphic games being considered a higher level of competition (in which the very best players in clans fight it out) than team games? Well yes I do - no doubt controversially - and I think we all need to face up to the fact that team games will not be considered the highest form of the game we play in the future as they obviously are now. This would indeed be a major shift in CC and I think it is going to happen.

The point of this thread has been to try and avoid, as I put it earlier, an 'enormous smash-up' in the clan world. We can already see here that some of us are in favour of clans playing polymorphic games and other are not. We will see the same division within all the clans and I think those that are reponsible for their clans, and those that are to an extent responsible for all the clans, need to consider carefully how polymorphic games are introduced into clan wars. It seems to me to be dangerous to have effectively two competing forms of the game operating within one, shall we call it, sport. One of them is a team game, the other a single player game. One only has to look at a sport like cricket where different forms of the game have negatively affected others (i.e one day cricket harming test cricket) to see that we must be very careful about how, and to what extent, polymorphic games are introduced into clan competition.

[iAmCaffeine]

I agree we came playing risk by playing risk in solo. But we played risk because we play with friends. Playing here single games, there is very few interation with other players. Playing team game give me those interactions. And being in a clan make me feel like playing with friends.

This is a very good point that I fully agree with.

The majority of risk I've played with family and friends, and for a long time before playing singles, was 2v2.

[Vid_FISO]

I will respond to some of the lengthier posts in detail later, but I would just like to make a couple of points independent of what has been said up to now and having considered the issue further these last couple of days.

First of all, I wonder if we can agree that polymorphic games are going to enter the cup and league competitions, probably taking up 25% of the games. I would also suggest that individual clan wars will begin to fight polymorphically within the next month or two. Those that have suggested that even the introduction of polymorphic games into clan competitions would impel them to leave their clan are, in my humble view, being rather unrealistic. Polymorphic games obviously have strategic validity, people are going to want to play them and the strongest players in particular are going to want to compete in this way.

Do I want to see team games ruined by polymorphia? Absolutely not, but do I see polymorphic games being considered a higher level of competition (in which the very best players in clans fight it out) than team games? Well yes I do - no doubt controversially - and I think we all need to face up to the fact that team games will not be considered the highest form of the game we play in the future as they obviously are now. This would indeed be a major shift in CC and I think it is going to happen.

The point of this thread has been to try and avoid, as I put it earlier, an 'enormous smash-up' in the clan world. We can already see here that some of us are in favour of clans playing polymorphic games and other are not. We will see the same division within all the clans and I think those that are reponsible for their clans, and those that are to an extent responsible for all the clans, need to consider carefully how polymorphic games are introduced into clan wars. It seems to me to be dangerous to have effectively two competing forms of the game operating within one, shall we call it, sport. One of them is a team game, the other a single player game. One only has to look at a sport like cricket where different forms of the game have negatively affected others (i.e one day cricket harming test cricket) to see that we must be very careful about how, and to what extent, polymorphic games are introduced into clan competition.

No need to quote all of your post, but to get into before your replies to previous posts -

I've no idea how other clans work, never been in one and unlikely ever to be, FISO is probably unique in the clan world due to us arriving en masse and for the most part sticking together.

I can only presume that many other clans operate in the way that you describe, having team leaders that on any given map/ settings may or may not take others opinions on board before "giving orders". Whilst we may well have players that do understand some maps significantly better than others, generally we have learnt maps and strategy together, for most of the maps we play there is no clear leader. For say, a quad team on map X that you would lead, if it's a regular map that we play, then all 4 will have a similar approach, discussion (and very occasionally a short argument) takes place when the team members consider it necessary, but for the most part they'll just get on with the game.

Now take that to a polymorphic, you're the obvious candidate to play an x4 on that map for your clan, we don't have that, any 1 of our 4 (or possibly more in the clan) could well be sufficiently competent to give you a run for your money. You yourself play a fairly narrow range of maps, whether you do or not I understand that some clans have players that will not play outside of their comfort zones, your/their choice of course, but as a clan leader I consider it a strength that no-one in our clan has ever refused an invite regardless of their dislike of any given map, they'll simply do their best and on occasions it has resulted in someone that previously disliking a map has changed their view to wanting it as a home map, although most of the time it just results in another loss and ranking points lost

Now thinking about including polymorphic in wars or having a complete war with the setting, for some clans 5-10 games with a handful of players involved is clear, but there also has to be others like us that have 10 or more players that would quite happily take on 5 or more different maps each with a very good number of them wanting to play the same maps.

Even though I've put out a challenge for a polymorphic war, the more I think about it the bigger a logistical nightmare it's likely to be and won't be upset if no-one decides to take me up on it, not in the near future anyway. To give everyone that would like to play a decent shot at home maps, say 15 players with 3 home maps each that would mean a minimum of a 90 game war.

Also very clear to me already is that x4 games have the potential to take a very long time to resolve, 2 players facing each other that both only log in once a day and don't cross each other online means that each round takes 8 days, even with a 30 round limit that's the best part of 8 months! That's going to hold any war up considerably! And yes, it's also possible for two players sat online to play a game to conclusion within a few hours RT.

The 1v1 clan tourney is nice and quick, a poly tourney could last several years!

[laughingcavalier]

Two players good. One player bad.

[JBlombier]

Two players good. One player bad.

I'm sure you have an opinion backing up that statement. Please place your opinion.